Video

Dead Rising 3: the graphics comparison

Now that Dead Rising 3 is out on PC, Shacknews puts the graphics to the test in a new video. How does this new version hold up against its Xbox One predecessor?

Ozzie Mejia

September 6, 2014 10:00 AM

Dead Rising 3 is out now on PC. While Shacknews has been celebrating the series' past with our recent timeline (you can check out parts one and two now), today focuses on the present. Namely, how does the game look, visually?

The Shacknews video crew has analyzed both the original Xbox One version and the new Dead Rising 3: Apocalypse Edition version on PC for a graphical comparison. For the sake of comparison, both games are running at the optimized 30fps, though Capcom has previously indicated that the game is capable of running beyond that on PC, depending on a user's hardware setup. Check out the video below and judge for yourself which version looks the best.

Ozzie Mejia

Senior Editor

Ozzie has been playing video games since picking up his first NES controller at age 5. He has been into games ever since, only briefly stepping away during his college years. But he was pulled back in after spending years in QA circles for both THQ and Activision, mostly spending time helping to push forward the Guitar Hero series at its peak. Ozzie has become a big fan of platformers, puzzle games, shooters, and RPGs, just to name a few genres, but he’s also a huge sucker for anything with a good, compelling narrative behind it. Because what are video games if you can't enjoy a good story with a fresh Cherry Coke?

Filed Under

From The Chatty

Refresh Go To Thread

Shacknews

 reply
September 6, 2014 10:00 AM

Ozzie Mejia posted a new article, Dead Rising 3: the graphics comparison.

Now that Dead Rising 3 is out on PC, Shacknews puts the graphics to the test in a new video. How does this new version hold up against its Xbox One predecessor?
- ant_hillbilly
  
   reply
  September 6, 2014 11:44 AM
  
  Awesome, I would like to see more of these comparisons going forward. Youtube compression is working against you but there isn't much you can do about it.
  
  You should also list the PC specs used when recording the pc footage.
  - OzzieMejia
    
     reply
    September 6, 2014 11:47 AM
    
    That's a good idea! I'll make sure to mention it to the crew.
- Arcanum
  
   reply
  September 6, 2014 12:39 PM
  
  That's pretty useful.
  
  What's with the dramatically different brightness levels? Are they an artifact of how the videos were recorded? Did one platform allow more brightness adjustment than the other? Is it the result of different lighting models?
  - FirstPersonCooter
    
     reply
    September 6, 2014 10:18 PM
    
    I noticed this too. Somehow the Xbox version seemed more "cinematic" albeit too dark at times, especially during the scenic shot. The PC version looked washed out and with a much choppier framerate.
    - Arcanum
      
       reply
      September 7, 2014 7:00 AM
      
      After playing it myself on PC yesterday, I think it's just a matter of how the brightness/gamma was set.
      - daggot
        
         reply
        September 8, 2014 7:24 AM
        
        Yeah, I was wondering how much the OS's or card driver's default might affect things like this.
- rtstan
  
   reply
  September 6, 2014 12:51 PM
  
  I'd also love to know the GPU and driver the test system was running. The PC version has an odd looking contrast ratio, shows a -lot- more framerate stutter, and the PC version's AA has a lot more jaggies than the console. I certainly wasn't expecting that.
  - Arcanum
    
     reply
    September 6, 2014 12:54 PM
    
    Huh? I didn't notice framerate stutter, and thought the PC version had a much less jaggy visual appearance (possibly due to running at a true 1080p resolution?).
    - rtstan
      
       reply
      September 6, 2014 1:05 PM
      
      We must have been watching different videos then. The very clear "stuttering" framerate looks like textbook frame variance spikes, which is why I'd love to know the GPU/driver used. Shadows are the only thing that seems to have better AA coverage on the PC versus the Xbox. Alpha coverage surfaces are very jaggy. I assume the Xbox is using a form of FXAA like usual that likely isn't enabled on the PC?
      - Arcanum
        
         reply
        September 6, 2014 1:34 PM
        
        After rewatching most of the video*, I think you're mistaking slight bluriness from upscaling on the Xbox One for anti-aliasing. Things on the PC mostly look sharply defined but not particularly jagged, while on the Xbox they often look rough but fuzzed out.
        
        * On Youtube, 720p, with the larger-but-not-fullscreen video box.
      - skinlab133
        
         reply
        September 6, 2014 2:31 PM
        
        FWIW it doesn't stutter like that with my 7970 latest drivers.
        
        SirX
        
         reply
        September 6, 2014 3:28 PM
        
        What's your frame rate like with your 7970? Seem smooth?
        
        skinlab133
        
         reply
        September 6, 2014 3:39 PM
        
        I think it's capped at 30? I haven't run fraps or anything yet or tried to unlock it.
        
        GreggD
        
         reply
        September 7, 2014 12:18 AM
        
        As far as I can tell, the frames never dip below 30 on my system. I'm using a GTX 770 4gb.
        
        GreggD
        
         reply
        September 7, 2014 12:19 AM
        
        Also, with the amount of streaming this game does after the initial loading screens, I would imagine the fact I have it installed to my SSD is making a bigger impact than most games.
        
        GreggD
        
         reply
        September 7, 2014 12:22 AM
        
        One last thing, I've been streaming it via Twitch, this is from earlier today:
        
        http://www.twitch.tv/greggdelirious/b/565669080
  - guido anchovy
    
     reply
    September 6, 2014 3:39 PM
    
    The framerate is terrible no matter what the settings on my old Radeon 6950 card.
- ashkie
  
   reply
  September 6, 2014 2:35 PM
  
  I cannot run this game as "full" resolution with an overclock 4930k and a titan. Bottleneck is definitely GPU. I wish this game supported SLI
  - Arcanum
    
     reply
    September 6, 2014 6:16 PM
    
    It's possible you're running into texture memory issues rather than raw GPU processing issues. I'm not sure how much it needs, but it's a lot.
    - ashkie
      
       reply
      September 7, 2014 2:07 AM
      
      My card has 6 gb ram. The most it's using is 1.5
      - Arcanum
        
         reply
        September 7, 2014 6:59 AM
        
        Weird. It was really, really choppy for me when I set texture resolution to "High", but smooth with texture resolution on "Medium". I have a GTX 670 with 2GB of RAM. If it's only using 1.5 GB of VRAM with "high" textures it should fit on even my card.
        
        daggot
        
         reply
        September 8, 2014 7:27 AM
        
        That might actually have to do with system ram, but would really depend on how their handling the texture management. But, we'd have to see numbers from near similar systems with the same card, but different speed system ram to really validate that.
  - vitek r
    
     reply
    September 6, 2014 9:21 PM
    
    sounds like its poorly optimized or just glitchy
- serenj
  
   reply
  September 6, 2014 10:17 PM
  
  It runs great for me, too bad it crashes every 5-20 min.
- Uglzorp
  
   reply
  September 7, 2014 1:56 AM
  
  These comparisons need to include the settings and hardware used on PC. Digital Foundry is a good example of how to handle cross-platform comparisons.
- [deleted] 2065296303
  
   reply
  September 7, 2014 2:56 PM
  
  [deleted]